top | item 33786729

(no title)

namkt | 3 years ago

They don't recommend because they don't see clear evidence in outcomes. See my EMA link below. This doesn't make the recommendation any closer than recommending not to.

discuss

order

enkid|3 years ago

No, "not having evidence" isn't the same as having evidence against. They clearly state in that website that it's ok for people outside of there recommendations to get the booster.

dahfizz|3 years ago

> At the moment, there is no clear evidence to support giving a second booster dose to people below 60 years of age who are not at higher risk of severe disease.[1]

The booster is an approved and safe procedure, but it confers no benefit unless you have risk factors.

[1] https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/ecdc-ema-update-recommenda...

bradleyjg|3 years ago

I’m not antivax or anti-medicine in any way but shouldn’t the null position be don’t inject things into your body and then it takes at least some evidence to overcome that?

leereeves|3 years ago

Shouldn't "having evidence for" be a requirement before something is mandated?

namkt|3 years ago

No, "not having evidence" isn't the same as having evidence against.

That is exactly the point that I made above.

And where does it so clearly state in the website that second part? And of course it's ok, but that doesn't make it a recommendation.